DOCSLIB.ORG

THE ENDURING IMPORTANCE of WILDNESS: SHEPHERDING WILDERNESS THROUGH the ANTHROPOCENE Patrick Ram Kelly

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
THE ENDURING IMPORTANCE of WILDNESS: SHEPHERDING WILDERNESS THROUGH the ANTHROPOCENE Patrick Ram Kelly University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Graduate School Professional Papers 2018 THE ENDURING IMPORTANCE OF WILDNESS: SHEPHERDING WILDERNESS THROUGH THE ANTHROPOCENE Patrick Ram Kelly Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy . Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Recommended Citation Kelly, Patrick Ram, "THE ENDURING IMPORTANCE OF WILDNESS: SHEPHERDING WILDERNESS THROUGH THE ANTHROPOCENE" (2018). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 11143. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/11143 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE ENDURING IMPORTANCE OF WILDNESS: SHEPHERDING WILDERNESS THROUGH THE ANTHROPOCENE By PATRICK RAM KELLY Bachelor of Arts, History, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 2001 Master of Arts, Philosophy, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, 2014 Doctoral Dissertation presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Forestry & Conservation The University of Montana Missoula, MT -- May 2018 Dane Scott, Committee Chair Society & Conservation Peter Landres Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute – US Forest Service Christopher Preston Philosophy Dan Spencer Environmental Studies Natalie Dawson The Wilderness Institute – University of Montana Kelly, Patrick, PhD., May 2018 Forestry & Conservation Introduction Chair: Dr. Dane Scott Introduction Wilderness and wildness have long been essential values at the heart of American conservation. Both have played critical roles in the formation of environmental ethics, providing a conceptual foundation for the belief that the non-human natural world is valuable for its own sake (Nash, 2001). After grounding and inspiring much of 20th century environmentalism, their influence in the current century has grown increasingly tentative. The arrival of what some have called the “Anthropocene epoch” – a term meant to capture the planetary scale impacts of human activity – now threatens the continued viability and relevance of wilderness and wildness to contemporary conservation. The challenges facing wilderness advocates are both physical and conceptual. Anthropogenic climate change, pollution, and the looming mass extinction crisis are all impacting the biophysical elements of wilderness areas (Stephenson & Millar, 2012; Long & Biber, 2015; Ceballos et al., 2015). At the same time, a growing chorus of “new conservationists” are calling for the abandonment of wilderness and wildness as useful values for guiding conservation (Marris, 2015; Kareiva et al., 2012). As the codification of these values into American law, the Wilderness Act and the areas it protects are on the front lines of this philosophical and political struggle. Those convinced of the continued relevance and moral value of wilderness and wildness for conservation must work to adapt these values to the physical and philosophical backdrop of the 21st century. This challenging task must be accomplished without compromising the values of restraint and humility that give wilderness and wildness their meaning and substance. The following three papers approach this challenge in several ways. The first identifies key insights in the writings of Aldo Leopold that help develop a general philosophical and ethical framework for the two papers that follow. Leopold valued wildness while also understanding the unavoidable role of management in conservation. His primary concerns were ecological ignorance and violent or overly disruptive techniques rather than the idea of management itself. The notion that wildness and management activity are potentially compatible rather than inherently oppositional – a key insight I draw from Leopold’s work – can be applied to contemporary ethical and policy issues in wilderness stewardship. This insight allows me to avoid unnecessary dichotomies and absolutist thinking that can plague wilderness management discussions. With this in mind, my second paper focuses on controversies over intervention in designated wilderness areas, while the third addresses apparent conflicts between the Wilderness Act and the Endangered Species Act. In both cases, taking a more nuanced and measured position allows for the adaptation of wilderness values without compromising the essential elements of humility and restraint. In the long run, this approach will help ensure that more landscapes are designated and protected from exploitation and degradation. This is one of the most important ways we can respond as conservationists to the unprecedented threats our species now poses to much of life on Earth. ii 1) The Lessons of “Wildness” in Aldo Leopold’s Scientific and Philosophical Journey to the Land Ethic Though only explicitly referenced a handful of times in his writings, wildness played an influential role in Aldo Leopold’s development as a conservationist, land manager, and environmental thinker. Over the years, encounters with wildness in his work as both a practitioner and observer of land management drove significant changes in his views on conservation. Leopold’s initial approach touted intense manipulation and control over the natural world, but would eventually give way to an attitude of humility and integration. Driven by lessons learned from the wildness of the non-human natural world, this evolution culminated in Leopold’s formulation of the land ethic. Offering a moral framework that re-imagined the human place in nature, this influential articulation of environmental value incorporated wildness by respecting the roles played by fellow members in the biotic community. An attitude of respectful guidance in management, as opposed to one of control and coercion, is at the heart of the land ethic. Contemporary conservationists – some of whom are now clamoring for more human control of the planet – would do well to heed this approach, lest they risk having to relearn the limits wildness places on human managerial ambition. 2) Shepherding Wilderness Through the Anthropocene: The Intervention Dilemma and the Future of Wilderness Stewardship This paper aims to restore and revitalize the relevance of wilderness and the Wilderness Act to 21st century conservation by addressing the controversy of ecological intervention. As human impacts on the naturalness of designated wilderness areas accumulate, the pressure to intervene in ecosystem processes grows. Any intervention undertaken to protect or restore the natural conditions of a wilderness area is in tension with the value of untrammeledness and the hands off approach to wilderness stewardship. Unfortunately, this tension has been mistakenly framed as a stark either/or choice between intervention and non-intervention – between either naturalness or untrammeledness. This framing has in turn fostered polarization in the environmental community, a situation that only serves to undermine the continued relevance of wilderness at a time when it is most needed. Rather than stay with this false choice between naturalness and untrammeledness, a third option is possible. Adopting a more comprehensive and balanced approach – one that sees naturalness and untrammeledness as interdependent wilderness values – will allow managers to adapt and, where necessary, to actively respond to undesirable changes while still maintaining the values of restraint and humility. 3) The Endangered Species Act and the Wilderness Act: Conflicting or Complementary Values? This paper addresses the conflicts that can and do arise when an ESA-listed species requires active agency intervention in designated wilderness. The ethical imperative and legal obligation under the ESA to protect and recover endangered and threatened species can place it in tension with the Wilderness Act when significant ecological intervention is involved. It is crucial that conservationists and wilderness advocates anticipate these conflicts and work to foster compatibility between wilderness stewardship and species conservation. Fortunately, this compatibility is possible through a comprehensive interpretation of wilderness character that includes native wildlife as an essential component. An analysis of judicial and agency iii interpretations of the issue offers the legal and conceptual foundation needed to support intervention in wilderness on behalf of endangered species. When the threat of extinction is introduced, interventions aimed at saving a species within a wilderness area are justified on the grounds that the loss of native flora and fauna is an irreversible loss of wilderness character. Fortunately, the needed interventions can be kept within the context of restraint and humility required in wilderness management. iv The Lessons of “Wildness” in Aldo Leopold’s Scientific and Philosophical Journey to the Land Ethic Patrick Kelly – PhD Candidate Franke College of Forestry & Conservation, University of Montana In 1918, at the age of 31, Aldo Leopold began his writings on wilderness preservation by confidently assuring the American public that it was unnecessary (1918). Placing full faith in the managerial prowess of Progressive Era conservation, Leopold (1918) touted the effectiveness of predator control and fire
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wilderness Act and Howard Zahniser
    WILDERNESS ACT AND HOWARD ZAHNISER In: The Fully Managed, Multiple-Use Forest Era, 1960-1970 Passage of the Wilderness Act of 1964 involved decades of work on the part of many people both inside the Forest Service and from a variety of interest groups. As early as the 1910’s and 1920’s, there were several important proponents of wilderness designation in the national forests. Three men are considered pivotal in these early years and all were Forest Service employees: Aldo Leopold, Arthur H. Carhart, and Robert Marshall. Their efforts were successful at the local level in creating administratively designated wilderness protection for several areas across the country. At the national policy level, there was a series of policy decisions (L-20 and U Regulations) in the 1920’s and 1930’s that made wilderness and primitive area designation relatively easy, but what was lacking was a common standard of management across the country for these areas. Also, since these wilderness and primitive areas were administratively designated, the next Chief or Regional Forester could “undesignate” any of the areas with the stroke of a pen. Howard C. Zahniser, executive secretary of the Wilderness Society (founded by Bob Marshall), became the leader in a movement for congressionally designated wilderness areas. In 1949, Zahniser detailed his proposal for Federal wilderness legislation in which Congress would establish a national wilderness system, identify appropriate areas, prohibit incompatible uses, list potential new areas, and authorize a commission to recommend changes to the program. Nothing much happened to the proposal, but it did raise the awareness for the need to protect wilderness and primitive areas from all forms of development.
    [Show full text]
  • America's Wilderness Trail
    Trail Protecti n The Pacific Crest Trail: America’s Wilderness Trail By Mike Dawson, PCTA Trail Operations Director To maintain and defend for the enjoyment of nature lovers the PACIFIC CREST TRAILWAY as a primitive wilderness pathway in an environment of solitude, free “from the sights and sounds of a mechanically disturbed Nature. – PCT System Conference mission, appearing in many publications and at the bottom of correspondence in the 1940s Many of us make the mistake of believing that the notion of set- The concepts of preserving wilderness” and building long-distance ting aside land in its natural condition with minimal influence trails were linked from those earliest days and were seen by leaders by man’s hand or of creating long-distance trails in natural set- of the time as facets of the same grand scheme. It seems clear that Mtings began with the environmental movement of the 1960s and one of the entities developed in those days has always been the set into the national consciousness with the passage of the 1964 epitome of the connection between those movements – the Pacific Wilderness Act and the 1968 National Trails System Act. Crest National Scenic Trail. But the development of these preservation concepts predates In recent articles in the PCT Communicator, writers have talked these landmark congressional acts by 40 years. A group of revolu- about the current association between the PCT and wilderness in tionary thinkers planted the seeds of these big ideas in the 1920s, this, the 50th anniversary of the Wilderness Act. Few are aware 1930s and 1940s.
    [Show full text]
  • Protect Public Use of Public Lands
    FLO17960 S.L.C. 115TH CONGRESS 1ST SESSION S. ll To release certain wilderness study areas in the State of Montana. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES llllllllll Mr. DAINES introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on llllllllll A BILL To release certain wilderness study areas in the State of Montana. 1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- 2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Protect Public Use 5 of Public Lands Act’’. 6 SEC. 2. RELEASE OF CERTAIN WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS 7 IN THE STATE OF MONTANA. 8 (a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds that— 9 (1) under the Montana Wilderness Study Act of 10 1977 (Public Law 95–150; 91 Stat. 1243), 9 wilder- 11 ness study areas comprising a total of 973,000 acres FLO17960 S.L.C. 2 1 of land in the State of Montana were set aside for 2 the Secretary of Agriculture to evaluate the suit- 3 ability of the wilderness study areas for designation 4 as wilderness in accordance with the Wilderness Act 5 (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.), with the evaluation to be 6 completed not later than 5 years after the date of 7 enactment of the Montana Wilderness Study Act of 8 1977 (Public Law 95–150; 91 Stat. 1243); 9 (2) between 1979 and 1986, the Chief of the 10 Forest Service completed the studies of the 9 wilder- 11 ness study areas and determined that 608,700 acres 12 of the original 973,000 acres designated as wilder- 13 ness study areas by the Montana Wilderness Study 14 Act of 1977 (Public Law 95–150; 91 Stat.
    [Show full text]
  • Wilderness, Recreation, and Motors in the Boundary Waters, 1945-1964
    Sound Po lit ics SouWildernessn, RecdreatioPn, ano d Mlotoris itn theics Boundary Waters, 1945–1964 Mark Harvey During the midtwentieth century, wilderness Benton MacKaye, executive director Olaus Murie and his preservationists looked with growing concern at the wife Margaret, executive secretary and Living Wilderness boundary waters of northeast Minnesota and northwest editor Howard Zahniser, University of Wisconsin ecolo - Ontario. Led by the Friends of the Wilderness in Minne - gist Aldo Leopold, and Forest Service hydrologist Ber- sota and the Wilderness Society in the nation’s capital, nard Frank. 1 preservationists identified the boundary waters as a pre - MacKaye’s invitation to the council had identified the mier wilderness and sought to enhance protection of its boundary waters in richly symbolic terms: magnificent wild lands and waterways. Minnesota’s con - servation leaders, Ernest C. Oberholtzer and Sigurd F. Here is the place of places to emulate, in reverse, the Olson among them, played key roles in this effort along pioneering spirit of Joliet and Marquette. They came to with Senator Hubert H. Humphrey. Their work laid the quell the wilderness for the sake of civilization. We come foundation for the federal Wilderness Act of 1964, but it to restore the wilderness for the sake of civilization. also revived the protracted struggles about motorized re c - Here is the central strategic point from which to reation in the boundary waters, revealing a deep and per - relaunch our gentle campaign to put back the wilderness sistent fault line among Minnesota’s outdoor enthusiasts. on the map of North America. 2 The boundary waters had been at the center of numer - ous disputes since the 1920s but did not emerge into the Putting wilderness back on the continent’s map national spotlight of wilderness protection until World promised to be a daunting task, particularly when the War II ended.
    [Show full text]
  • Ed Zahniser Talk on Wilderness
    "There is [still] just one hope . ." Memory as Inspiration in Advocating Wilderness and Wildness By Ed Zahniser A Brown-bag Lunch Talk by Ed Zahniser to the Staff of the Wilderness Society 900 Seventeenth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006 February 15, 2000 Time as an arrow has not been invented here yet. Time is not an arrow here. Time is not an arrow hurtling along an inevitable trajectory with the neo-Darwinian myth of social progress as its arrowhead. No. Time is like a spiral. And yes, the tradition you and I are so much a part of in this room has been here on Turtle Island since the beginning of time. See, the beginning of time is right down there - see it? It's not far down- right there! On the spiral. We'll be there shortly. Think of spiral time like this Slinky toy. Pass it around. Get a feel for spiral time. That funky gap in this slinky, where the spiral got sprung, well, maybe that's the atomic bomb, Hiroshima, Nagasaki. "We can't talk about atoms anymore because atom means indivisible and we have split it." [Jeanette Winterson] We can talk about wilderness and wildness, about perpetuity. You can hear the beginning of time in our stories we tell. Listen. The alphabet is not invented yet. Our words are still like things. Our words still point to real things in the world of sense and feelings. We still enjoy reciprocity with the sensuous world [David Abram, The Spell of the Sensuous]. Trust me.
    [Show full text]
  • The Wilderness Act of 1964
    The Wilderness Act of 1964 Expanding Settlement Growing Mechanization “Wilderness protection is paper thin, and the paper should be the best we can get — that Versus upon which Congress prints its Acts.” David Brower, 1956 “Let’s be done with a wilderness preservation program made up of a sequence of threats and defense campaigns! Let’s make a concerted effort for a positive program … where we can be at peace and not forever feel that the wilderness is a battleground.” Howard Zahniser 1951 “If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them with a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it”. Lyndon B. Johnson Wilderness Act of 1964 Statement of Policy “ …to assure that an increasing population, accompanied by expanding settlement and growing mechanization, does not occupy and modify all areas within the United States and its possessions, leaving no lands designated for preservation and protection in their natural condition…” Sec 2(a) Wilderness Act of 1964 Statement of Policy “…it is hereby declared to be the policy of the Congress to secure for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness.” Sec 2(a) The Wilderness Act….. 1. Created a NWPS and established a process for adding new areas NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM 1964 9.1 Mil Acres 54 Wilderness Areas 2014 109.8 Mil Acres 762 Wilderness Areas The Wilderness Act….. 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Mechanization in Wilderness Areas: Motors, Motorized Equipment, and Other Forms of Mechanical Transport
    BRIEFING PAPER TOOLS AND PRECEDENTS FOR USING THE WILDERNESS ACT UPDATED: April 2003 MECHANIZATION IN WILDERNESS AREAS: MOTORS, MOTORIZED EQUIPMENT, AND OTHER FORMS OF MECHANICAL TRANSPORT INTRODUCTION With only very narrow exceptions, the Wilderness Act bars the use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment or motorboats, the landing of aircraft, and any other form of mechanical transport within wilderness areas. These prohibitions include wheeled cargo carriers, mountain bicycles, and other non- motorized forms of mechanical transportation. A special provision of law allows wheelchairs, including certain forms of motorized wheelchairs. This Briefing Paper traces the history and meaning of these prohibitions, the agency regulations implementing them, and the narrow exceptions provided in the Wilderness Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The underpinning of the prohibition on mechanization is found in the fundamental congressional policy statement of the Wilderness Act: to secure for the American people of this and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness. Statutory designation of wilderness areas is necessary, Congress said, in order to assure that an increasing population, accompanied by expanding settlement and growing mechanization, does not occupy and modify all areas within the United States.1 In the Wilderness Act, Congress asserts that the essence of wilderness IN THIS BRIEFING PAPER as its contrast with those areas where man and his works dominate Historical context 2 the landscape.2 As Aldo Leopold wrote: The words of Recreation is valuable in proportion to the intensity of its the Wilderness Act 3 experiences, and to the degree to which it differs from and Forest Service originally contrasts with workaday life.
    [Show full text]
  • The Reverie Genre: Rousseau, Dostoevsky, Eliot, and the Roots of Modern Consciousness
    W&M ScholarWorks Undergraduate Honors Theses Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 4-2014 The Reverie Genre: Rousseau, Dostoevsky, Eliot, and the Roots of Modern Consciousness Corinne Tucker College of William and Mary Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/honorstheses Part of the Comparative Literature Commons, French and Francophone Literature Commons, and the Literature in English, North America Commons Recommended Citation Tucker, Corinne, "The Reverie Genre: Rousseau, Dostoevsky, Eliot, and the Roots of Modern Consciousness" (2014). Undergraduate Honors Theses. Paper 82. https://scholarworks.wm.edu/honorstheses/82 This Honors Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Undergraduate Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Reverie Genre: Rousseau, Dostoevsky, Eliot, and the Roots of Modern Consciousness A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Bachelor of Arts in English from The College of William and Mary by Corinne Tucker Accepted for ___________________________________ (Honors, High Honors, Highest Honors) ________________________________________ Adam Potkay, Director ________________________________________ Brett Wilson ________________________________________ Guilia Pacini ________________________________________ Erin Minear Williamsburg, VA April 28, 2014 2 Table
    [Show full text]
  • A Preservation Paradox: Political Prestidigitation and an Enduring Resource of Wildness
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln College of Law, Faculty Publications Law, College of 2004 A Preservation Paradox: Political Prestidigitation and an Enduring Resource of Wildness Sandi Zellmer University of Nebraska Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/lawfacpub Part of the Legal Studies Commons Zellmer, Sandi, "A Preservation Paradox: Political Prestidigitation and an Enduring Resource of Wildness" (2004). College of Law, Faculty Publications. 7. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/lawfacpub/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law, College of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in College of Law, Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Published in Environmental Law 34 (2004), pp. 1015-1089. Published by Lewis and Clark Law School. http://law.lclark.edu/law_reviews/environmental_law/ SYMPOSIUM ARTICLES A PRESERVATION PARADOX: POLITICAL PRESTIDIGITATION AND AN ENDURING RESOURCE OF WILDNESS The nation's preeminent preservation statute, the Wilderness Act of 19M, is now 40 years old. By authorizing a network of congression& designated wilderness areas on pubLic lands, the Act has proved invaluable for protecting special areas from the most intensive forms of intrusion by humankind But the Act is facing a midlife clisis, and legitimate questions have been raised about its continuing viV7abili@as a conservation tool. ZXis Article concludes that the preservation of wild lands remains an essential component of federal public lands management, but that the Wilderness Act, standug alone, has not fhEUed itspromise of securing an endunhg resource of wild lands, President Chton and his agencies employed a van'ety of techniques for identifjiing and protectmg wild places on federal lands outside of the wilderness network.
    [Show full text]
  • Desolation Wilderness
    RESEARCH IN A NUTSHELL ALDO LEOPOLD WILDERNESS RESEARCH INSTITUTE http://leopold.wilderness.net/ NATIONAL WILDERNESS Legally correct name of the wilderness cited in the enabling public law. PRESERVATION SYSTEM DATABASE Public law that established the wilderness. http://www.wilderness.net/nwps/ search_wild_areas_main.cfm Date the enabling law was signed by the President ˜˜ Acreage designated in the enabling Keywords: wilderness public law, National public law. Wilderness Preservation System, Wilderness Act Modifying public law or laws that affect the Background & Management Issues: In 1964, the Wilderness Act established a National name, boundary, or administration. Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS) composed of 9.1 million acres of Forest Service Current total acreage reported by the land in 54 wildernesses. By 1999, the NWPS is administering agency. composed of over 104 million acres in 628 wildernesses distributed across 44 States and managed by four Federal agencies. With this Agency or agencies with administrative growth in size and complexity, and the constant authority. legislative and administrative changes to the system, there is an increasing need for a single, Administering units within each agency. accurate, and up-to-date source of information about all the wildernesses in the NWPS. State or States in which the wilderness is Project Objectives: located. To provide a single, on-line source for consistent and accurate data on the wildernesses in the National Wilderness Results: Preservation System in an accessible and easy-to-use format. A search engine was developed to facilitate user access to the desired information. The search engine To summarize general trends in the allows the user to: administration and distribution of wilderness from the inception of the National Wilderness Preservation System (1) obtain all of the information in the database for a in 1964 through 1999.
    [Show full text]
  • A Hands-Off Approach to Preserving Wildness in Protected Areas
    Chapter 6 Let It Be: A Hands-Off Approach to Preserving Wildness in Protected Areas peter landres We should have the wisdom to know when to leave a place alone. —Sir Peter Scott In an era of rapid global climate change and other pervasive anthropogenic ecological insults, many scientists and managers have few qualms about taking action to mitigate the effects of these insults, including in areas that are protected by law as wilderness, wildlife refuges, or national parks. For example, habitat is manipulated to sustain populations of selected threat- ened and endangered species, nonindigenous invasive species are removed, and extirpated species are reintroduced. Even with important technical ad- vances in the ecological sciences over the last several decades, ecologists still question the feasibility of managing biodiversity in the face of continued environmental change. For example, Western (2004: 496) wryly notes in an essay on the paradox of managing wildlands that “like the Red Queen running in place, we are destined to manage ever harder to save any sem- blance of the natural until . the unmanaged will be more managed than the managed to preserve the illusion of the natural.” Is there an alternative to becoming locked into managing what is not fully understood in an environmental context that is rapidly changing? The 88 ch06(pt2).indd 88 12/22/09 8:43:28 PM A Hands-Off Approach to Preserving Wildness in Protected Areas 89 purpose of this chapter is to explore the reasoning behind and steps toward implementing the hands-off alternative. This alternative focuses on one of the three meanings of naturalness described in Chapter 2: freedom from intentional human control, intervention, and manipulation.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Law 88-577
    Public Law 88-577 AN ACT September 3, 1964 __....c(_s._ 4....cl __ To establish a National Wilderness Preservation System for the permanent good of the whole people, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Wilderness Act. United States of America in Congress assembled, SHORT TITLE .. SECTION 1. This Act may be cited as the "Wilderness Act". WILDERNESS SYSTEM ESTACLISHED STATEMENT OF POLICY SEC. 2. (a) In order to assure that an increasing population, accom­ panied by expanding settlement and growing mechanization, does not occupy and modify all areas within the United States and its posses­ sions, leaving no lands designated for preservation and protection in their natural condition, it is hereby declared to be the policy of the Congress to secure for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness. For this purpose there is hereby established a National Wilderness Preser­ vation System to be composed of federally owned areas designated hy Congress as "wilderness areas", and these shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such manner as ,vill leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of their wilderness character, and for the gathering and dissemination of information regarding their use and enjoyment as wilderness; and no Federal lands shall be designated as "wilderness areas" except as pro­ vided for in this Act or by a subsequent Act.
    [Show full text]